Does Microsoft like Perl and PHP?

[paddy@panici.net]

On Tue, Oct 16, 2007 at 10:03:04PM +0100, Paul LeoNerd Evans wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Oct 2007 16:53:49 +0100
> David Cantrell <david at cantrell.org.uk> wrote:
> 
> > > I challenge you to name me a single MUA that displays, in any way, the
> > > "References" or "In-Reply-To" fields by default, when composing a reply.  
> > 
> > If you're not replying, you shouldn't hit 'reply'.  Not even Lookout is
> > stupid enough to combine "new message" and "reply" into one button.
> 
> That's not the point.
> 
> The UI makes them look equivalent - to the uneducated user, there is NO
> difference between "reply" and "new + to: + subject:". He doesn't know
> about the extra headers, because he can't see them.
> 
> Ergo, he believes "new + to:" == "reply - subject:", so he does the
> latter as it's easier to just delete the subject.
> 
> The UI does not teach him these aren't the same.
> 
> Consider for example, moving a file vs. copying then deleting it. The UI
> doesn't make it obvious for example, such issues as inodes, and other
> hardlinks, and so on.
> 
> I'm not saying the UI is entirely to blame here, what I _am_ saying is
> that the UI doesn't make any effort to teach the user his actions are
> incorrect.
> 

This is by design in some cases.  Email isn't only SMTP email. There are
still networks using X400 and no doubt other monsters. You don't type
an X400 address unless you really have to.  Reply is often the easiest
way to be sure of getting the address right, and in the case of an 
individual recipient they quite possibly not mind.  

Mailing lists are the exception.

Regards,
Paddy